Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) HEARD Shri Sharad Madhyan, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel. No notice is being issued to the Respondent Nos. 2 to 9 in view of the order which is being passed. However, liberty is reserved for Respondent Nos. 2 to 9 to make an application for variation or modification of the order if they feel so aggrieved.
(2.) BY this writ petition, Petitioner has prayed for a mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1 to refer the application of the Petitioner under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called the "Act, 1894") to the District Judge for adjudication and till the matter is finally decided, compensation may not be disbursed to anyone. Brief facts giving rise to the writ petition are: Ganga Ram, the father of the Petitioner and the predecessor in interest of Respondent Nos. 4 to 9 along with Mangat, Jai Bhagwan and Devi Ram was cobhumidhar of Khasra No. 196, 198, 266, 267, 268, 269, 349, 350, 351, 353 total area 13 -10 -0. Land acquisition proceedings were undertaken in which the plots mentioned above were acquired and award under Section 11 of the Act, 1894, was prepared showing Ganga Ram, Mangat, Jai Bhagwan and Devi Ram, sons of Murli as persons entitled to receive the compensation. Reference under Section 18 of the Act, 1894 was made on which LAR No. 175/1979 was registered. The District Judge, Ghaziabad passed an order on 27/2/1986 and 24/3/1986, enhancing the amount of compensation. Against the Judgment of the order of the District Judge, First Appeal No. 778/1986, Mangat and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors. was filed which appeal has been decided by this Court vide judgment and order dated 22/3/2010, enhancing the amount of compensation. Ganga Ram, the father of the Petitioner died on 02/1/2006. Petitioner claims that Ganga Ram had executed a will on 28/10/1998. Petitioner made an application before the Additional District Magistrate, Land Acquisition on 23/12/2010, praying for making a reference to the District Judge under Section 30 of the Act, 1894 for apportionment of 1/12th share of compensation in favour of the Petitioner. Petitioner has filed this writ petition stating that the Respondent No. 1 is not referring the dispute to the District Judge, hence a writ of mandamus be issued directing the Respondent No. 1 to make reference under Section 30 of the Act, 1894.
(3.) SHRI Sharad Madhyan, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the application can be filed under Section 30 of the Act, for reference by any of the claimants, and there is no limitation for filing an application under Section 30 of the Act. He submits that the right accrued to the Petitioner to claim apportionment of compensation after the death of Ganga Ram and the application which has been made needs to be referred under Section 30 of the Act, 1894.;